At present, stop lights are incorporated in three or more tail lights that give a constant illumination and lack any motion to attract the attention of following drivers. When brakes are applied, either another set of lights are energized or another filament in the tail light is energized to give brighter illumination. The increase in illumination is the only signal that a driver is slowing or that the vehicle is stopping. The following driver is not certain if a fast or emergency stop is taking place and his reaction may not be responsive enough to avoid a collision. This lack of response is caused by the indefinite signal from a one intensity stop light system and multiple collisions often occur on high speed freeways where drivers do not maintain a safe braking distance between vehicles.
At present, none of the back-up alarm systems on either vehicles or equipment, display an active warning light. Heavy equipment is required by law to give an audible signal which may or may not be heard by a person in a closed vehicle. The back-up lights on most vehicles cannot be seen by pedestrians standing at the side of the vehicle and they may have no warning the vehicle may back up. There is a large class of vehicles and equipment that operate along highways and streets that stop and start frequently but give no signal to approaching vehicles. Whether moving or stationary they are often a hazard that is easy to overlook due to lack of a warning signal. The non-lighted fluorescent triangle gives very poor warning of the hazard.
At present, vehicles are not equipped with an automatic collision or roll-over signal light. If a driver passes out and the vehicle leaves the road or crashes or rolls over, the driver may be trapped and die before someone notices the vehicle. The vehicle may be parked unattended and be struck by another vehicle which subsequently drives off if the collision is unseen. A vehicle can be involved in a collision where the driver is unable to operate either the brakes or the emergency warning lights, and due to lack of warning, other vehicles could be involved in an additional collision.
At present, none of the emergency warning light systems incorporate a moving flashing light.
______________________________________ DESCRIPTION OF PRIOR ART ______________________________________ 2,873,437 02/10/59 Gruner & Ebbage 340/70 2,960,680 11/15/60 Lea 340/70 3,037,188 05/29/62 Weigl 340/91 3,487,358 12/30/69 Ubukata, Mizutand & Iyoda 340/81 3,800,430 04/02/74 Samra 340/95R 3,818,438 06/18/74 Stacha 340/70 3,818,439 06/18/74 Maine 340/81R 3,832,968 09/03/74 Martin 116/28R 4,250,486 02/10/81 Kiefer, Lysenko & Cade 340/52R ______________________________________
The patent with the most similar function appears to be U.S. Pat. No. 2,960,680 a Safety-Stop & Distress Signaling System issued to Mr. Lea on Nov. 15, 1960. As described, the unit uses an electrical motor driven disc to make and break the light beam from the safety stop light. The light itself is stationary and the illusion of motion would be no more eye catching than a flasher unit in series with the light which would be much less expensive to manufacture. U.S. Pat. No. 4,250,486 is a Vehicle Motion Alarm issued to Mr. Kiefer, Mr. Lysenko and Mr. Cade in Feb. 1981. As described, the motion switch acts only when the vehicle is moving with the vehicle engine stopped, or when the vehicle transmission is in neutral. The unit has a completely different function and the construction is also very different.
Patents have also been searched for a manually controlled emergency signal light similar to this invention and none were found.